Re: [Pinky-develop] Package Imports/Style was Re: PiNKY 0.1.0 Released

[Brian S. <br...@bo...>]

On Feb 23, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Peter Rodgers wrote:

> So for flexibility/malleability we tend to use a * imports of packages
> in NK module classes rather than class by class.
>
> I can live with class-by-class if that's the consensus, just  
> thought I'd
> raise a general point.

<shrug>

> PS Butterfield Condensed Bracket Notation eg
>
> method()
> {	blah;
> 	blah;
> }
>
> is the in-house 1060 style.  This originates from Mr B. who is an
> obsessive normalizer and will not tolerate any waste of space -  
> probably
> 'cos he learnt his craft developing z80 assembler games using peek/ 
> poke.

I don't care what the style is, I just want it to be consistent. In- 
house 1060 style works for me.

Do we have any guidelines about language features? 1.4 only? 1.5? 1.3?